Skip to main content

Full text of "Our Country, Right or Wrong"

See other formats






155 East 44th St., New York 17, N. Y. 

Only that nation which cannot devise a better system 
than communism need fear communism. Technocracy 
looks upon communism as being too bourgeois and con- 
servative for North America, but sufficiently radical and 
revolutionary for the Old World. 



Our Country, Right or Wrong Page S 

More Confusion, Worse Confounded Page 17 

Two Worlds or None! Page 23 

First Printing, October 1946 
Second Printing, November 1946 
Third Printing, February 1947 
Published by Continental Headquarters, Technocracy Inc. 
155 East 44th St., New York 17, N. Y. 

Copyright 1946 
Technocracy Inc. 

Printed in U. 8. A. 


IN August 1946, one year had passed since the surrender of 
Japan and the cessation of military warfare of World War n. 
European fascism surrendered on May 9, 1945, to be followed by 
the Japanese capitulation on August 14, 1945, and now over a 
year later let us review the war, the Allies then and now. 

Prior to World War II the Axis nations formed the Fascist 
Anti-Comintern Pact. Germany, Italy, Hungary, Spain and Japan 
were the members of this Anti-Comintern Axis, which was 
formed by the fascist powers to oppose and combat bolshevism 
and social change. Great Britain, France and, to a somewhat 
lesser extent, the United States lent tacit support and material 
help to the Axis crusade against the U. S. S. R. and social change 

After World War I, Great Britain supported economic re- 
habilitation in Germany in order to revive her own world trade. 
The tory conservatives of Britain and their governments of 
Baldwin and Chamberlain indulged in a surreptitious economic 
and political support of Hitler, and did their best to further the 
rise of German Fascism in order to create a bulwark in eastern 
Europe against the westward spread of Russian Bolshevism. 

In 1938 Czechoslovakia stood as the only obstacle to a fascist 
war on Russia. Fascist governments existed in Poland, Hungary 
and Rumania, providing the springboard for an attack by the 
Germans, but Czechoslovakia remained an ally of Russia, with 
formidable armored divisions and geographically natural de- 
fences. France was bound by the treaty of 1925 to go to the aid 
of Czechoslovakia if attacked. Russia was pledged to aid France 
in the protection of the Czech state. 

In the spring of 1938 France under the Popular Front was 
ready to come to the help of Czechoslovakia if assured of British 
support. The British Prime Minister on March 24 refused to give 


any pledge to that effect. The French Popular Front government 
of Leon Blum fell and was replaced by the reactionary govern- 
ment of Edouard Daladier. Soviet Russia again and ag*ain de- 
clared her determination to honor her legal obligations toward 
Prague and to come to her aid if attacked, provided France did 
likewise. Russia terminated her non-aggression treaty with 
Poland and notified that country that Russian troops would be 
forced to cross Polish territory to come to the aid of Czecho- 

Diplomatic Treachery 

Neville Chamberlain, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, 
and Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax journeyed to Munich ac- 
companied by the Premier of France, M. Daladier, where they 
on behalf of their respective governments signed the Pact of 
Munich with Hitler and Mussolini, selling out the Republic of 
Czechoslovakia. The agreement to the Pact of Munich was de- 
manded by Hitler and Mussolini in order that Germany and Italy 
could eliminate Czechoslovakia, the last fighting ally of Russia, 
so that they could declare war on the Soviet Union. This is 
stated quite openly in the documents of the Munich discussions 
as a prerequisite to a fascist war on Russia. 

The world now has documentary proof that when the repre- 
sentatives of Great Britain and France signed the Pact of Munich 
they agreed not to 'peace in our time' but to a war of fascist 
Europe on Soviet Russia. Small wonder that Russia was not 
invited to take part in the Munich conference! The diplomatic 
treachery of 1938 became so involved and so confused that by 
September 1939 we find Great Britain and France, who had 
refused to protect democratic Czechoslovakia, declaring war on 
Germany for the protection of Fascist Poland. There followed 
the 'sitzkrieg' war through the winter of '39 and '40. Then came 
the debacle. The fascist powers overran Denmark, Norway, 
Holland, Belgium, France and the Balkans. 

Call it by its Name — Fascism 

On June 22, 1941, European fascism began its long-planned 
attack on Soviet Russia and military conflict began in stark 
reality, compared to the opera boufie of German invasion up 
until then. On December 7, 1941, the United States was attacked 
at Pearl Harbor and we were automatically at war. The attack 


of the Japanese on Pearl Harbor and the United States Declara- 
tion of War on Japan were followed almost immediately by a 
declaration of war upon the United States by Germany and Italy 
and their satellites with the exception of Finland. 

Technically, Great Britain went to war because her fascist 
ally, Poland, was invaded by Fascist Germany; France because 
she had a treaty of alliance with Britain ; Soviet Russia because 
she was invaded by the fascist armies of Europe; the United 
States because she was attacked at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese 
Air Force. France went out of the picture when she was over- 
run, and became a Vichy ally of European fascism, leaving 
Britain, the United States and Russia as the chief powers fighting 
the armies of the fascist powers of Europe and Asia. 

The United States Government, through its leaders before 
and since December 7, 1941, has proclaimed many times in 
various places that the United States was fighting a war against 
aggressors, against tyranny and against bandit nations. Never 
once did any leader in the United States or Canada ever proclaim 
or state that either Canada or the United States was fighting a 
war against fascism. A rather sad and sorry spectacle to have 
a nation of 140,000,000 engaged in a war fighting to defeat the 
armies of fascism but not fascism itself! 

The irony of this is brought out in the war criminal trials 
at Nuremburg wherein the American and British prosecutors 
sum up the case for their respective governments against the 
fascist war criminals, and ask that the verdict of the court be 
imposed upon them because 'they are guilty of having conspired 
to wage a war of aggression.' 

Japan surrendered August 14, 1945, and World War II 
technically, but not officially, came to an end with this surrender 
of the last of the fascist belligerents. In the year which has 
followed the cessation of hostilities, the United States policy in 
the pursuit of world peace has taken on a belligerency that was 
not exhibited in any of the patriotic propaganda necessary for 
the conduct of the war. During the war, the Armed Forces of 
the United States were in military conflict in the islands of the 
Pacific, in Africa and western Europe as the main theatres, with 
side-shows on the Burma-China front. 

Today, a year after the surrender of the last of our enemies, 
the Armed Forces and the diplomatic and economic representa- 
tives of the United States are exhibiting a belligerency that is 
equivalent to the open advocacy of World War III. The propa- 
ganda of the present foreign policy of the United States is one 
wherein our previous enemies, the Germans, the Italians and 


the Japanese, are encouraged officially and with large doses of 
humanitarian aid to accept spiritual absolution from thejr prev- 
ious sins, and to transform themselves with American assistance 
from their former position as enemies into the democratic 
position of being honorable allies. 

The fascist nations of the world fought the dirtiest war in 
history. The records of brutality, murder, disease and devas- 
tation of this fascist war will be forever remembered. When 
one views the record of this war with all its horrors, one can only 
consider a peace in which the fascist nations will be treated as 
defeated nations with the distinct purpose that all of the power 
of the victors shall be organized to prevent any recurrence of 
fascism that deluged the world in the bloody calamity of World 
War II. This does not mean that we are herein advocating that 
the settlements of peace should be based upon revenge. 

The Armed Force of the United States was but one of the 
armed forces fighting the armies of fascism. Great Britain, 
Canada, India, Australia, New Zealand, Yugoslavia and China, 
in cooperation with the giant armies of Russia, were the other 
Allies that won the war. Great Britain, the United States and 
Russia were the Big Three that determined the military conduct 
of the war. They were Allies in fighting the enemy. 

Russia's New Position 

World War II has ceased. Russia has strengthened and 
consolidated the position which she enjoyed in 1939, that of a 
powerful contiguous continentalism. Russia in 1946 is in a much 
stronger geographical position than she was prior to the war. 
Her armed forces constituted the chief contribution in the defeat 
of the enemy. Politically, the position of Russia has grown from 
one of partial isolation. She has extended her political frontiers 
to where today she is the leading political and military power 
exercising control and administration of the greatest single 
contiguous area on earth. Russia in peace finds herself sup- 
ported by allies of considerable geographical extent and military 

Russia didn't study under Dale Carnegie. Her process of 
making friends and influencing people has been far more ex- 
tensive and much more effective than the cheap salesmanship 
of a Carnegie. Today in 1946, for better or for worse, Rumania. 
Bulgaria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Albania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, 
Finland, and the Republic of Outer Mongolia are now treaty 


allies of the U.S.S.R. The center of their political orbit is 
Moscow — not Rome, not London, not Paris and not Washington. 

Russia has regained most of her territories that were lost 
when her former allies, the western democracies, turned on her 
and separated from her, her various border territories. Esthonia, 
Latvia, Lithuania and Bessarabia have been brought back into 
their national state. Finland, which was Russian territory longer 
than the United States west of the Mississippi has been 
American, remains a separate republic. 

Russia on the western front has acquired several small 
pieces of territory not previously Russian, the tip-end of East 
Prussia down to and including a point west of Konigsberg and 
the small tail-end province of Czechoslovakia known as Carpatho- 
Ruthenia. This last acquisition puts the boundaries of Russia 
across the Carpathian Mountains and into the plains of Hungary 
for the first time. In the east, the lower half of the Island of 
Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands insuring Russian control of the Sea 
of Okhotsk plus control of Port Arthur and Dairen, along with 
the recognition of the Republic of Outer Mongolia, have estab- 
lished Russia's political and military preeminence in Far Eastern 
and Northern Pacific affairs. 

Russia has gained in political and military stature and has 
acquired friends and allies. Her friends and allies, it must be 
noted here, are but an extension of the geography of her con- 
tiguous continentalism. The Russian strategy is one which 
always seeks a geographical implementation of Russian policy. 
Today, the Russian orbit stretches from Lubeck on the Baltic 
to Trieste on the Adriatic, down the Adriatic including Yugo- 
slavia and Albania, and across Bulgaria to the Black Sea. 

Temporarily Greece and the Dardanelles are politically out- 
side this orbit but this is of slight moment. In 1914, Great 
Britain and France promised Czarist Russia the gift of Con- 
stantinople and the Dardanelles for her participation in World 
War L Today the Montreux Convention has been denounced and 
is no longer in effect. Russia seeks, and will ultimately acquire, 
the joint administration of the Dardanelles by the Black Sea 
powers. To those who take up the cry of opposing Russia as a 
protagonist of the century-old British policy of domination of 
the Mediterranean, may we say in passing that the strategic 
harbors of Valona, Durazzo, Pola, Fiume and Trieste are in 
reality Russian ports of entry on the Mediterranean. 

On the Baltic, the coastline of Finland, Russia, Poland, and 
Russian occupied Germany automatically give Russia geo- 


graphical control of the Baltic which, supported by her economic 
power, will automatically tend to compel Norway, Sweden and 
Denmark to become party to a Baltic cartel. 

Prior to World War EI, Germany occupied the position of 
leadership in the Berlin-Rome-Tokyo Axis Pact of Fascism as 
a world bulwark against bolshevism and social change — for the 
preservation of the status quo. For over twenty years Europe 
was deluged with the propaganda of a religious crusade, calling 
on all the faithful to oppose and fight bolshevism and any social 
change that differed from their medieval concepts. This religious 
crusade sired political fascism ; political fascism attained political 
power in Hungary, Italy, Germany, Spain and Portugal as its 
main national proponents. This crusade and its ideological po- 
litical offspring finally carried its conflict to the last court of 
appeal, physical force, and its armies began World War IL 

The armies of fascism have been completely and utterly de- 
feated. This defeat has no similarity to the Armistice of No- 
vember 1918. Italy, Germany and Japan no longer remain as 
military powers. 

National and International Disaster 

During the war the foreign policy of the United States was 
one of military furtherance of the war, and economic and military 
assistance to those countries fighting the nations of the Axis 
Pact. Since Potsdam, the foreign policy of the United States has 
openly taken on a new direction from an entirely different po- 
sition. Peace has ushered is a new collection of political ex- 
pediencies and economic opportunities to which our foreign policy 
has geared itself with entirely new objectives. 

The objectives of the foreign policy of the United States 
over a long-time trend carry with them a political and economic 
portent which, if carried to their seemingly logical conclusion, 
are an invitation to national and international disaster. The 
policy of tho United States abroad has shifted from that of being 
an accessory political adjunct in assisting the economic pene- 
tration of American big business to more and better exploitation ; 
the policy today is a propaganda of enhancement of the concept 
that the United States is the sole possessor of the ideological 
leadership of the world. 

The propaganda of this policy has been pushed to such an 
extreme by the careerists of our national representation that the 


United States has become in their eyes the sole sovereign power 
of the globe. The financial success of the United States in World 
War II, combined with the comparative ease of military victory, 
has swept us off our feet and we have become imbued with the 
swelled head of 'one world,' a one world conceived of by the 
politicians, to be owned and operated by bigger and better busi- 
ness, purely private of course. 

Concern (or the Enemy 

For several centuries the British Empire has been the chief 
proponent of a foreign policy of economic and political imperial- 
ism. As the rest of the world changes and the resource position 
of the British Isles grows continually more hazardous, it becomes 
obvious that the foreign policy of British imperialism can no 
longer be maintained by the British Isles, nor can such a policy 
be bolstered up by the substitution of the United States for the 
British Empire in the world leadership of this policy. 

During the war the United States was an ally of the greatest 
military power. Since the war, the new foreign policy of the 
United States is now based upon the theory that the former 
enemies of the United States in World War II can be revived by 
the military and economic power of the United States into be- 
coming 'our noble allies.' 

The United States today occupies Japan and half of Korea, 
and has military forces in North Chinese territory. In Europe, 
the United States and Great Britain jointly occupy Italy. The 
United States, Great Britain, and France occupy western Austria 
and Germany. The economic burden in Japan, Italy, Western 
Austria and Germany falls chiefly upon the United States. While 
Great Britain and France in general support the occupation 
policy of the United States in Europe, they nevertheless do not 
possess the economic wherewithal to sustain the costs of opera- 
tion without the preponderance of American economic and po- 
litical support. 

The foreign policy of the United States is today one of the 
most ironic reversals that any nation has ever permitted itself 
to make. We, the United States, in the propaganda supporting 
our foreign policy, reek with an obsequious solicitude for the 
cultural, political and economic welfare of our former enemies, 
who only a few months ago were engaged in the business of 
killing Americans. 


Thus foreign policy of ours today is deeply concerned over 
the unfortunate and depressing conditions of the Japanese, the 
Italians, the Austrians, and the Germans. This policy of ours 
abroad demonstrates quite clearly that we are more concerned 
over the condition and the plight of our former enemies than we 
are over the people and the condition of this Continent. This 
policy reeks with all the diplomatic and political maneuvering 
under the heavy meringue of international humanitarianism. 
The policy today is highly charged with the propaganda for 
immediate World War m. 

The Lame, the Halt and the Blind 

Every North American had better stop and face the question 
squarely. Where is the present foreign policy of the United 
States leading? Can we continue to behave as No. 1 power of 
the world with a chip on both shoulders ? Can the United States 
with such a policy dominate the ideological leadership of the 
world when it lacks an ideology that it can present to the world ? 
Can our economic power long continue to support a political 
worldwide offensive for more and better business? We must face 
the fact that an immediate World War IU would be an easy 
temporary solution to the insoluble problems that lie just ahead 
for the Democratic Administration of the United States, the 
Liberal Party Government of Mackenzie King and the economic 
systems of North America. 

For those who advocate war now it would be wise before we 
contemplate another war, to find out who the allies of the United 
States would be in this war to beat Russia now. Great Britain 
and its population are too fatigued and worn out with the long 
drawn out undernourishment of World War II to relish another 
war. Furthermore, the people of Britain have no stomach for 
it politically. France would be split. As for Sweden, Norway and 
Denmark, one may as well write them off as being already 
members of the Russian orbit. 

The United States apart from this Continent would be com- 
pelled to consider the Japanese; the Chiang Kai-shek Chinese; 
the Italians ; the Austrians of western Austria ; the Germans of 
Bavaria, Wurttemburg, Baden and the Rhineland ; the Portuguese, 
Spaniards, Brazilians and the Argentines. Technocracy asks the 
question: 'Are these any allies to fight a war?' A collection of 
the lame, the halt and the blind, of all the military vanquished 
and politically defeated! 


There is furthermore another stumbling block that every 
North American must realize — if the United States pursues this 
belligerent policy to the point of war she would for the first time 
be compelled to become the aggressor and the invader nation. 

The Japanese for some years along the 2200 miles of Man- 
churian-Russian frontier did their best to create war by incidents 
of minor invasion, but it is interesting to note that even the 
major engagements of Changkufeng Ridge, Nomanhan and 
Khalka River which were full-scale military operations were 
never admitted by Russia to be sufficient pretext upon which to 
start a war. This same historical strategy of Russia still persists 
and no amount of incidents on the part of the United States 
forces anywhere will be construed by Russia as an act of war. 
Only a total outright invasion and declaration of war would be 
recognized as such. 

It will be rather difficult for the United States to sell a war 
of aggression to the people of this Continent. Even our best 
advertising agencies will find that a dilemma. The United States 
prosecution at Nuremburg charged the Nazi war criminals with 
being guilty of conspiring to wage a war of aggression. If the 
legality of this indictment has any validity, would our national 
leaders be guilty of the same conspiracy ? 

The New Axil 

Iii its foreign policy, the United States has in effect created 
a new axis — a Washington-Rome-London Axis. The United 
States in this new axis occupies the same position of leadership 
that Cermany did in the old axis. In the old axis Germany spear- 
headed the bulwark against Communism and Russia; in the new 
axis the United States has unfortunately permitted the mantle 
of leadership of 'stop Russia' to fall upon its shoulders. 

Our position abroad is never determined by any positive 
policy of what could be done in any given area, but only by the 
negative policy of what can be done in any area to oppose the 
supposed policies of Russia and her satellites. In doing this and 
In carrying this mantle the United States has acquired satellites, 
not allies. Great Britain is passing from the scene as a first 
class world power and has become chief satellite in the foreign 
policy of the United States, nobly assisted by Italy, France, 
occupied Western Germany and Japan. 

In Europe and every country in which the United States 
is acting as a military government of occupation, her policy of 

1 1 

military government backed by her economic support has under- 
written the formation and establishment of Catholic Centrist 
parties. They have been revived with American aid to 'absorb 
the fascist political residue. Catholic Centrist parties in Italy, 
Austria, Western Germany, France, Belgium and Holland have 
received the open and active support of the United States. The 
Catholic Centrist party in Germany was dissolved by its own 
leaders to make way for Hitler. In Europe we are supporting 
the forces of reaction, politically and economically, but the ques- 
tion arises on a long term basis, can the United States alone 
remake and reconstitute a resource deficient Western Europe, 
with or without an act of Congress? 

A Foreign Liability 

Today the United States is committed in its foreign policy 
to the economic and political support of a defeated Italy, geo- 
graphically minus her colonies and considerable territory. Italy 
is one of the worst headaches included in our foreign policy as 
well as nationally the worst deficit among the defeated nations. 
Italy's position today is more desperate from the standpoint of 
resources and markets than it has ever been. 

Britain and Germany supplied most of the coal to sustain 
Italian operation in normal times. The bulk of Italian production 
went north to Germany and her customers. Italy used to import 
six to seven million tons of coal a year from Britain, and an 
even larger amount from Germany. Today, Great Britain no 
longer exports coal — she cannot produce enough for her own 
consumption. The coal production of Western Germany is only 
around 40% of 1938, and Eastern Germany under the Russians 
will probably continue to be cut off both as a source of supply 
and as a market. Western Germany is bankrupt and can there- 
fore provide neither raw materials nor a market for Italian 

There are only two nations in the world today that can 
supply Italy with the needed raw materials — Russia and the 
United States. If the United States supplied the raw material 
she would be unable to provide Italy with a market, so Italy 
would still have to find a market for material manufactured 
from American resources. On the other hand, if Russia supplied 
the raw materials, she could also supply the market. A frighten- 
ing picture — to find that the possible economic salvation of Italy 
and the Holy See lies in the territory of the hated Communists! 


This of course would call for a political and economic indulgence 
transcending even the spiritual. 

The foreign policy of the United States is vociferous in its 
demands for internationalization of the Danube. Whether it 
bases this claim on the little tailend of the Danube from the 
Austrian frontier to Regensburg is of no moment. Its policy 
here again is not one of opening navigation on the Danube, or 
of joining the Danube and the Rhine or the Elbe, but one of 
opposition to the operation of the remaining 98% of the Danube 
River by the Russian dominated powers along its banks. 

The United States has never been a party to, or a member 
of, any Danubian authority and it is politically and historically 
rather late in the day to try to get its feet in that river. We 
are in the logically absurd position that Russia could with equal 
validity propose the internationalization of the St. Lawrence 
River and the Great Lakes, on the basis that they too are 
navigable to ships in international trade. One doesn't hear of the 
United States and Great Britain proposing such magnanimity 
in the control of the Panama Canal and the Suez. 

The Mediterranean — An American Mare No»trum 

The latest abortion in our foreign policy is the forthright 
stand of United States over the question of the Dardanelles. The 
Montreux Convention was the international agreement, signed 
before the war, that was supposed to govern the international 
rules and conditons regarding the use of the Dardanelles in war 
and in peace. Great Britain, l'Yance, Italy, Germany, Yugoslavia, 
Greece, Bulgaria, Rumania, Russia, Japan and Turkey were 
signatories to the Montreux Convention. The United States of 
America has never been on the Danube or at the Dardanelles. 
It has no historical precedent for this step in its foreign policy, 
but may we point out that with Italy, Germany and Japan out 
of the Montreux Convention a new Montreux Convention would 
be unable to outvote the Russians. 

For this reason the United States has now declared itself 
to be the leading Mediterranean power. The poor British are 
called upon to support this new aggressiveness of our foreign 
policy for an American Mare Nostrum in the Mediterranean. 
Quite naturally the United States will be told that its diplomatic 
position on the Dardanelles is irrelevant, incompetent and im- 
material, for the United States in order to vigorously support 


this Dolicy in the Dardanelles would have to revive and sustain 
Turkey economically as an American outpost. 

This would mean a tremendous cost of material supplies to 
Turkey and the absorption of all Turkish surplus production. 
The United States would have to become practically the sole 
market for Turkish exports. Turkey has been and now is in a 
rapidly deteriorating economic position. Turkey is not self- 
sufficient and has neither the industry nor the resources to 
provide the physical wealth to maintain large standing armies. 
The present policy of Turkey is rapidly leading to economic 
impoverishment. The coming year will witness the full impact 
of an economic force majeure upon the Turkish state. 

The flow lines of Turkish trade were across the Black Sea 
and through the Balkans to Europe. Russia has cut off Black 
Sea traffic and trade to the Balkans. A defeated Germany is too 
desperate and too poor to come to the aid of Turkey, and Great 
Britain no longer possesses the means to hold up Turkey on her 
own. Time is not with the Turks. Politically, in one's own 
country it may be quite a gesture to throw your hat in the ring, 
but in international diplomacy one should never go throwing 
diplomatic hats into far off places where one only holds deuces 
and not aces. If Secretary Byrnes keeps this up, he will run 
out of hats ! 

Religious Crusades 

The foreign policy of the United States in its international 
belligerency is supported here at home by a Continent-wide 
barrage of propaganda in the press, radio, screen and pulpit 
for an immediate war on Russia. The chief proponents of this 
propaganda in the national press are the Hearst papers, the 
Scripps-Howard chain, to be followed in lesser order by Patter- 
son's Daily News and other papers owned by reactionary big 
business. This jingoistic clamor in the public press for 'attack 
Russia now' is only exceeded in viciousness by the anti-Russian 
propaganda of the Roman Catholic press of the United States 
and Canada. 

The present Pope at the papal consistory of the College of 
Cardinals publicly called for a worldwide war on communism by 
all Catholic adherents, and instructed Roman Catholics every- 
where to enter the political arena as Catholic parties to carry on 
this political warfare in the countries of their domicile. Here 
in the United States and Canada, every day brinps fresh in- 


stances of this political propaganda of the Vatican being dressed 
up in new forms of appeal, hate and persuasion for the people 
of this Continent. 

The Vatican had papal concordats with Hitler's Germany, 
Mussolini's Italy, Horthy's Hungary, and Fascist Poland. Since 
the Lateran Accord of August 1929 with Italy, the Vatican lent 
its complete moral and spiritual support to the fascism of Italy, 
Hungary, Spain, and Germany. The Axis Pact of Fascism re- 
ceived the moral support of the Vatican in its war on Russia 
in World War H. The Vatican is now completely in the open in 
its advocacy of the use of armed force to continue its war against 
the Russian State. 

It is high time that the people of this Continent ceased 
fighting wars abroad in support of either London or Rome. 
Religious crusades in this day and age are the lowest form of 
international venality. It is high time that the people of this 
Continent awake to their true position. We are being exhorted 
for immediate war against the U.S.S.R. Communism is repre- 
sented as the great evil which must be suppressed. The people 
of this Continent are now being asked to fight World War HI 
to save the world from communism. Most amazing ! Never once 
in World War II did the press of the United States exhort the 
people of this country to save the world from fascism! 

Only that nation which cannot devise a better system than 
communism need fear communism. Technocracy looks upon 
communism as being too bourgeois and conservative for North 
America, but sufficiently radical and revolutionary for the Old 

Ensuring World Peace 

Technocracy contends that world peace can only be ensured 
and enforced by an offensive and defensive alliance of the two 
great contiguous continentalisms of the world — the Continent 
of North America and the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. 
These two continental areas dominate the world from the stand- 
point of geography, arable land, natural resources and techno- 
logical potentialities. No world war could develop unless the 
materiel for such a war were procured from one or the other 
of these continental areas. The fifty-one nations of the United 
Nations are an irrelevant hodge-podge. The United States has 
to choose between an alliance with Russia for the creation of a 
'Big Two' for the preservation of world peace, and the mesal- 


liance with the nations of the hodge-podge and an open invita- 
tion to war. 

Technocracy takes the position, 'Our country! In he* inter- 
course with foreign nations may she always be in the right; 
but our country, right or wrong.' We hope our country will 
always be right but if our country is wrong it becomes the 
collective duty of every American to make it right. 



IN 1930 the great depression was well under way. Herbert 
Hoover and the Republican Administration were in power in 
Washington ; R. B. Bennett and the Conservative Party were 
administering Canadian national affairs in Ottawa. In 1932, 
Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Democratic Party campaigned 
in the depth of the depression for a 'New Deal' for the Demo- 
crats, and by implication social reformation for the rest of the 
inhabitants of the United States. 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was inaugurated as President, 
and the Democratic Party assumed political power in Wash- 
ington on March 4, 1933. Two years later the Liberal Party 
of Canada under the Honorable Mackenzie King came into office 
as the political administration of Canada. The regimes of the 
Liberal Party in Canada under the leadership of Mackenzie 
King and the Democratic Party in the United States under the 
leadership of Franklin D. Roosevelt maneuvered Canada and 
the United States politically through the great depression and 
World War TJ. 

The policies of these two parties in relation to national 
affairs have been similar, if not identical, in their day-to-day 
tactical expediencies. In the United States, the political ascend- 
ency of the New Deal was hailed nationwide by all the fervent 
well-wishers and liberals of that day as initiating a new age 
in the social legislation of the United States. 

The long parade of alphabetical combinations, from NRA 
and AAA to WPA, are almost forgotten. The parade of the 
alphabets has passed. Franklin D. Roosevelt is deceased, and 
the New Dealism of the Democratic Party lies buried along 
with its founder. Mackenzie King is still Prime Minister of 
Canada, but only by the grace of God and a coalition of French 
Canadian Independents. The Liberal Party no longer has the 


political power to sustain him in office. The passing of the New 
Deal Democratic Party will be followed shortly by the demise 
of the Canadian New Dealism of the Liberal Party. 

Wholesale Political Bribery 

Franklin D. Roosevelt and Mackenzie King have been vocif- 
erously hailed by their political supporters as statesmen of 
world rank. The course of events refuses to sustain these 
contentions. Statesmen, no! Politicians, yes! An impartial 
analysis of national events over the last decade confirms the 
contention that Franklin D. Roosevelt was undoubtedly one of 
the most adroit politicians ever elected to political leadership 
in the United States. Mackenzie King was an equally adroit 
Franklin D. Roosevelt of Canada. 

The political process in both countries was compounded of 
a mixture of continual expediency and compromise in which all 
issues were evaded by resolving the issues into a series of ever 
greater compromises. It must be borne in mind that no charge* 
of individual corruption or malfeasance in office can seriously 
bo entertained against either the Liberal Party of Canada or the 
Democratic Party of the United States during this long tenure 
of political office. But the very process under which national 
affairs were administered by this political New Dealism was one 
by which the national morale was subverted by the wholesale 
indirect *bribery' of entire blocs of the population by federal 
alteration of the national income structure for the particular 
benefit of the recipient bloc. 

Political parties of yesteryear developed to a fine art the 
process of attaining political power by direct monetary purchase 
of the necessary number of ward bosses and their cohorts with 
promises of jobs for the rising young men of any political dis- 
trict, and the assurance of increased business in the local aren 
This political process entailed the purchase of political power by 
the old-time picayune method of dishing out sufficient monetary 
rewards and assurances to swing the majority of ward bosse* 
and district bosses, although it might be deemed as being un 
democratic in that it never reached down to the grass roots to 
involve the majority of the people. It was distinctly a retail 

When the Democratic Party in the United States came into 
power in 1933, Tammany evacuated its untenable position on the 
banks of the Hudson and moved to the banks of the Potomac, 


there to institute the new process of political procurement and 
persuasion. This was carried to the ultimate in democratization, 
wherein mass blocs of the population were economically seduced 
in order to secure their political support. 

The Gravy Train 

Temporary economic salvation was pumped into the national 
mechanism by the political machine whenever and wherever the 
cries of distress became too clamorous to be ignored. If markets 
were not iar?e enough, they were subsidized; if market prices 
were too low, the price was raised by creating market scarcities 
by open market purchases on the part of the government; if 
markets did not exist, they were created both at home and 
abroad. Unable to loan abroad, the United States created foreign 
purchasing power by the fictitious method of devaluation of gold 
at home. The federal government pumped more relief funds in- 
to corporations than were paid out in the WPA. 

Any move whatsoever to nationally supply a palliative was 
crowned with success, because fortuitously the march of events 
provided the political administration with a succession of calami- 
ties which they could capitalize into another evasion of the 
fundamental national problems. 

Volumes could be written depicting the thousands of cases 
in which these methods have been used across this Continent 
within the last decade or more. We have neither space nor time 
to waste on the enumeration of long lists of specific cases. We 
must herein deal with the broad general picture of the political 
manipulation of our economic order within the last decade, and 
of the political hazards with which this Continent is faced as 
the result of the continuous political denial of the fundamental 
problem of this country and this Continent. 

The war raised these political methods to their zenith. Never 
before in the history of man has the conduct of war been made 
so profitable so easily. Technically, the Governments of the 
United States and Canada have been at war; actually, the people 
of these two nations have during the period of the war been 
participants in the greatest gravy train of war prosperity ever 
visited upon any people. Our respective snoots and all four feet 
have been in the trough of this gravy train throughout the war. 

Needed — A New Concept 

The military war has terminated for the United States and 
Canada; the economic war continues. Greater political conflicts 


lie ahead than have yet been experienced by the people of this 
Continent. The technological expansion of the productive 
capacity of the United States and Canada and the increase in 
the consumption of extraneous energy highlight the highway 
of the political tomorrow. 

The gigantic production of raw materials necessary for the 
fabrication of war materiel has brought about the serious de- 
pletion of the national resources of Continental United States. 
The United States is no longer the virgin territory of un- 
developed resources. We are running low in copper, lead, sine, 
hematite iron ore and oil. The United States no longer possesses 
the necessary resources for the illimitable expansion of private 

The farms of the United States are continuing to increase 
in size; the national average new exceeds 190 acres. The farm 
population of the United States is declining. Both of these trends 
will not only continue but will be accelerated as the cotton picker, 
the corn harvester, the beet, potato and sugar cane harvesters 
march in ever-increasing numbers across the agricultural fields 
of America. The problem of soil erosion and soil depletion is 
with us greater than ever. The problem of forestry looms ever 
larger as we massacre more billions of board feet per annum. 

The oil companies of America have become hysterical in 
their search for new oil territories on this Continent. The war 
has proven that rail and truck transportation are too high in 
their ton-mile costs to economically transport the abundance 
that technology is waiting to distribute to the people of this 
Continent. Vast sources of potential hydro-electric power still 
tumble precipitously down to sea-level. Water tables are falling 
from Ohio to California, from Texas to Peace River. This 
Continent of North America with over 50% of the fresh water 
of the world has no political party that has even a single concept 
regarding this — one of our greatest natural resources, one of our 
greatest heritages. 

Ton Dayt to tho WPA 

The lush prosperity of the war, combined with the move- 
ments of our military forces, has created the greatest migratory 
problem in our history. The United States Bureau of Census re- 
ports that approximately 28,000,000 Americans migrated from 
their original local habitats. California has a new headache 
with approximately 2,000,000 indigestible new Californians. The 


migratory tendencies are both occupational and climatic. Larger 
cities are favored over smaller ones, warmer climatic areas in 
preference to colder and bleaker areas. The southern negro and 
white tenant farmer are moving north to our larger cities. The 
small town inhabitant wants to move to the bigger town — the 
bigger the better. 

The people of the United States have come out of the war 
with the greatest national debt ever known and the greatest col- 
lection of savings deposits, bonds and other financial accumula- 
tions. Financially, the United States is the wealthiest country on 
earth. Who says we aren't? The nation has $130 billion 
in accumulated savings. It should not worry us that 60% of 
our savings are held by 10% of the families, that over 70% of 
the families of the United States have so little security that if 
they lose their jobs they are only ten days away from the WPA 
in the richest country on earth. An amazing situation ! 

The increased monetary amount that comes in your pay 
envelope or your salary check may carry with it the gratification 
of increased figures, but you find yourself being able to buy less 
and less with more and more. No cars, no meat, no sugar, no 
sheets, no shirts, no shoes, no soap — and no place to live! This 
is the result of the political stewardship of our national economy. 

Th» Political Goulath 

In Canada, the Liberal Party is in power in Nova Scotia, 
Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. The Union Nationale 
dominates the Province of Quebec. The Conservative Party is 
in control of the Province of Ontario. In Manitoba a coalition 
administers that fair province. In Saskatchewan, the CCF is 
almost exclusive in its control of the political administration of 
that province, and in Alberta the Social Credit Party is in the 
same enviable position. British Columbia has a political coalition 
in power. 

Canada today is a political goulash, with every component 
in the political stew seeking political power under this Price 
System, none of them sufficiently revolutionary in their political 
conceptions to provide the leadership and to create the loyalty 
that will be required by all Canadians for their political future. 

In the United States, the Democratic Party is a coalition of 
reactionary southern Democrats, the liberal-labor vote, and the 
state political machines of Pendergast of Missouri, Kelly-Nash 
of Illinois, Hague of New Jersey, Farley-Flynn of New York and 


Curley-Walsh-McCormack of Massachusetts. The Canadian 
political picture at least has its party ingredients identified and 
labelled; in the United States, the Republican and Democratic 
Parties are similar mixtures of local party machines, big busi- 
ness, labor support, and the clerically directed vote of the Italian, 
the Pole, the Slovene, the South German and the Spanish speak- 
ing population. 

In the face of all this, Technocracy asks: 'Can you expect 
from the political parties of this Continent anything but more 
compromise, greater deception and more confusion?' 

Technocracy is the only Organization on the Continent of 
North America whose presentation to the people of this Continent 
is the same Continent-wide. Multi-political parties can never 
federate this Continent into a contiguous continentalism. Multi- 
political parties cannot inaugurate security and abundance for 
the people of North America. A house divided against itself 
eventually must fall. The people of this Continent must develop 
a Continental consciousness of their social destiny. National 
direction under multi-political parties is the road to national 
anarchy. Technocracy indicts all political parties as purveyors 
•of further Continental confusion. 


THE technological application of physical science has become 
the major ferment in social change. For centuries mankind 
has been the protagonist in military war, religious conflicts and 
other attendant struggles for survival. For over seventy cen- 
turies mankind has made war mostly for loot, conquest, and re- 
ligious conversion. During all these centuries there have evolved 
a collection of concepts arising from the habituation of mankind 
to the human-toil, hand-tool production of physical wealth. These 
concepts have been further modified and molded by the over-all 
imposition of theological dogma and the escapism of philosophic 

Man in his struggle as a social animal has been dominated 
and ruled down through history by two orders of knowledge. 
Theology or spiritual knowledge can probably claim precedence. 
Subsequently, philosophy or metaphysical knowledge came into 
being to beguile the mind of man in the physical world with the 
comforting logic of an abstract world. Both these orders of 
knowledge comforted and solaced him in his temporary journey 
in this mundane world, wherein mankind worked and suffered 
in the here and now to gain the rewards of an Elysium hereafter. 

This process of the social conditioning of mankind has been 
in operation for over seventy centuries. It is only within the 
last four centuries that a new order of human knowledge has in- 
truded itself into the thought patterns, the ways and means 
of human society. 

Today, a year after the close of World War II, science and 
technology present the greatest challenge ever hurled in seventy 
centuries of history against the ramparts of human concepts 
and social traditions. 

The governments and social structures of these past 
centuries were the cumulative accretions resulting from the 


habituations of mankind from producing his physical wealth with 
human toil and hand tools buttressed by tradition and twin 
ruling orders of knowledge. The masses of mankind in* every 
time and every clime and under every form of political govern- 
ance have been so conditioned and so patterned to a major social 
concept that there has been no indication in the thought patterns 
of any fundamental diversions until the last two decades. 

That major social concept is the one which proscribes all 
human thought, will, and effort into complete acquiescence of the 
physical world being incapable of any alteration of design, and 
of being subject only to the omniscience of a spiritual deity and 
the minor modifications of geologic time. Salvation for mankind 
only existed in a spiritual world beyond the grave, completely 
out of this world. The two dominant orders of knowledge and 
the process of producing physical wealth have so conditioned 
and indoctrinated collective mankind that even today the 
promulgations in the national press, pulpit, screen, and literature 
still contend that the major social problems of mankind are 
incapable of solution by any collective action of the human be- 
ings in this physical world. Any attempt on the part of science 
and technology to create design and direction for human society 
in continental orders of magnitude is immediately decried by all 
of the traditionalists, reactionaries and radicals alike. 

The Dictum of Science 

Science is the methodology of the determination of the most 
probable. Science alone can determine how to do what, where, 
and when. Modern technology is the engineering of the design, 
construction, and operation of the continuous processes of pro- 
duction and supply of the what, when required anywhere. For 
the first time in the history of man human society possesses the 
knowledge, the techniques and the instrumentalities of achieve- 
ment to organize a designed direction for the survival of social 
man. All that prevents its achievement is the opposing force 
of conditioned concepts that man's only reward is hereafter. 

The peoples of North America and the so-called western 
world have been deluged by the political concept of 'one world' 
a la Wendell Willkie and the United Nations. This concept of 
one world is a half brother to all the concepts that originated 
prior to 1648. The planet Earth is one world as a planetary body 
revolving in its orbit around the sun. Earth is one of the planets 
of the solar system — the solar system is but a minutia in the 
galactic systems. 


Socially on this planet Earth, there is not one world but two 
distinct worlds. One world socially, politically, and economically 
is that world which has come down to us from the historical past 
wherein social man fought his environment and produced his 
physical wealth solely by human toil and hand tools. That world 
can only expand by increasing its population, provided of course 
that its area has the resource capacity to sustain the increased 
population growth. 

That world of tradition and antiquity can increase the total 
volume of its physical wealth only by having more human beings 
engaged in human toil with hand tools, but any increase that 
world may achieve in the production of physical wealth is so in- 
significant that the income level of the individual citizen remains 
relatively unchanged. That world, whether in possession of re- 
sources and climate or not, cannot with or without God's grace 
produce and distribute abundance, well-being, and security to 
its entire citizenry. 

Let the scientist, technologist and engineer lay down the 
dictum here and now that no economy under any form of govern- 
ment can, regardless of the beliefs and morality of its citizenry, 
increase its per capita production of physical wealth by human 
toil and hand tools alone. Producing physical wealth solely by 
the expediture of human energy dooms any economy to the 
starvation subsistence level of the primitive peoples of the 
pretechnological age. No political economy can envisage any 
solution to the problems of poverty, disease and malnutrition, ex- 
cept by the consumption of other energies outside the human 

The New World 

There is another world that exists today on this planet 
alongside of the social world just described. The newer social 
world differs fundamentally in its structure and operation from 
the social world of antiquity. This technological world produces 
its physical wealth by the degradation of extraneous energy 
through technological equipment and processes. 

This technological world is the antithesis of the world of toil. 
Their destinies have nothing in common and will be in a state of 
perpetual conflict. This technological world can only increase its 
total volume of production of physical wealth by working less 
human beings less and less. This world can only progress by 
eliminating human effort as a chief factor in the production of 
physical wealth. 


The world of toil has preached the morality of toil and the 
dignity of human labor. It has encouraged craftsmanship and 
rewarded the attainment of skill by the few with economic 
proprietary rights over the many. The Grecian world of 400 B.C. 
differed so slightly in its process of producing physical wealth 
from that of the new-born United States of 1780 that Plato could 
have sat down to breakfast in Mount Vernon with George Wash- 
ington and enjoyed the sweet reasonableness and understanding 
of complete social compatibility. 

This technological world treats man as a collective social 
animal and organic energy-consuming device operating in a 
given area in a specific time period. It does not treat social 
man as a moral, legal, ethical or spiritual entity; these are the 
distinctions and the categories born of seventy centuries of toil 
conceived in human perspiration and perpetuated in continuous 

The technological world knows that the status of mankind 
can only be elevated out of the social morass of yesterday by the 
technological conversion and consumption of extraneous energy 
from coal, oil, gas, hydro-electric power, wind, internal earth 
heat, tides, solar energy, molecular energy, and atomic energy. 
Only by rendering greater volumes of extraneous energy more 
available, and increasing the efficiency of energy-consuming de- 
vices, can any social system produce an abundance of goods and 
services sufficient to eliminate toil and poverty. 

Leisure has connotations only in the world of toil — leisure 
will have no connotation shortly in this oncoming technological 
world of ours for, as more and more energy-consuming devices 
are installed, consuming ever greater quantities of extraneous 
energy, more and more human beings will be eliminated as human 
effort contributors in the production of wealth. As more tech- 
nology pervades the Continent of North America, more and more 
North Americans will cease to be toilers and will be elevated to 
the high social level of being consumers of abundance. 

An Enormous Expenditure 

Modern technology lays down a new method of social analy- 
sis. Those nations and economies that have the highest per- 
centage of their adult population working the greatest number 
of hours annually belong to the world of toil. Those economies 
such as Canada and the United States that have a declining per- 
centage of their total adult population working less and less are 


racing toward their Continental destiny. Economies of this type 
face a political, social, and economic reconstruction fundamentally 
more revolutionary than the combined political upheavals of 

The United States in the year 1944 consumed 35,707 trillion 
B.T.U.s of extraneous energy. This is the all-time high of energy 
consumption by any nation in history. This consumption is at 
the rate of 180,000 kilogram calories per capita per day. Canada 
reached its all-time peak of 140,000 kilogram calories per capita 
per day in the same year. It was this terrific consumption of 
energy that enabled the United States to maintain over 14 mil- 
lion of its most able-bodied citizens in its armed forces, and at 
the same time export billions of dollars of Lend-Lease to the 
other allied nations around the globe. 

This all-time high of energy consumption not only equipped, 
maintained, and supplied the Armed Forces of the United States, 
and produced and transported the vast volumes of Lend-Lease, 
but at the same time produced the greatest quantity of con- 
sumers' goods ever consumed by the American people per annum. 
This huge production of war goods, physical plant and equip- 
ment, and consumer goods became possible only because the 
United States possessed the resources, the technological equip- 
ment and the engineering skill to achieve it. This achievement 
was attained in spite of the machinations of political partisanship 
and chiseling skullduggery of business enterprise, big and little. 

The United States and Canada in five years of World War II 
mobilized their respective armed forces, and organized their huge 
technological production while coordinating their national effort, 
politically and economically, for the collective attainment of a 
common goal — military victory. This military victory cost over 
$300 billion and over 300,000 lives. For the $300 billion spent 
in war, the nation will have very little to show except a huge 
surplus of partly usable war assets, war plants, most of which 
are already obsolete, and a collection of military bases and air 
fields of questionable importance in our Continental strategy of 
the future. 

A Challenge — and a Warning 

These two nations could with equal facility mobilize their 
man-power, their machines and their money for a physical and 
economic rehabilitation that would be an investment in the future 
of a Continent and its people. An efficient expenditure of $300 
billion under a technological control would banish toil, poverty 


and disease from the face of this Continent. Let every citizen 
of this Continent ponder this well. The peoples of Canada and the 
United States have it within their power to impose -their will 
upon the conduct of human affairs just as easily as they ac- 
ceded with patriotic fervor to the demands of a war economy. 

Science or physical knowledge is being ushered in as the third 
order of knowledge in the affairs of men. The two other orders 
of knowledge have dominated mankind until today but it becomes 
imperative that they be relegated to their proper positions and 
that the conduct of human affairs be dominated by science, the 
physical knowledge of the world in which we live. 

In the passing of the old and the instituting of the new, 
human conflict will become the bitterest in history. Science is 
hated and feared by ecclesiastical institutionalism, by corporate 
enterprise and political parties. The fear and hatred that will be 
directed by these against science and its technological applica- 
tion will be far greater than those the Inquisition hurled against 
all the accumulated heresies. Only science and its technological 
application to the means whereby we live can produce for man- 
kind the control of his social destiny here on this earth. 


It becomes imperative that the conduct of human affairs 
be dominated by science, the physical knowledge of the 
world in which we live. In the passing of the old and 
the instituting of the new, human conflict will become 
the bitterest in history. Science is hated and feared by 
ecclesiastical institutionalism, by corporate enterprise 
and political parties. The fear and hatred that will be 
directed by these against science and its technological 
application will be far greater than those the Inquisition 
hurled against all the accumulated heresies. 

SECTION I, R. D. 11140 


P. O. EO v ' -3 ~~ PHONE 9-7531